Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Luciferian wrote:

At this point, Kylo represents a rejection of all meaning. He is more or less nihilist, or at the least trying to represent a Nietzschean Will to Power.

If that's your read of Nietzsche, then you read him wrong. If you interpret nihilsim as the rejection of all meaning, then you failed to understand an entire philosophical movement.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We know that Luke Vs. Snoke in an ultimate showdown ain't happening.

We already knew that from the moment the sequel trilogy was announced. Luke is not a main character, there was exactly zero chance that he was going to be participating in any final showdown.

And we know that the rebels will defeat the First order, and we'll be right back where we were at the end of ROTJ...

You could say the same about ROTJ, we knew that the rebels would defeat the empire because that's how movies work. But somehow it was still worth watching.

The fans wanted a Luke/Snoke showdown.

Well, at least I did anyway.

Yeah, we knew that the rebels would win in ROTJ, but like Death Stars getting blown up, there's only so many times you can keep playing that card until story fatigue creeps in.

The First Order could have worked as some kind of splinter force Vs the new Republic. An annoying irritant, but not galaxy dominating.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
No only has Rey consistantly failed to anything Jedilike aside from swing a lightsaber about, but she's never said anything Jedilike either, promised to do anything, or seemed particularly in keeping with wanting to restablish the Jedi herself. She wanted to redeem Kylo, sure, but that's about it, and her reasons for doing so appear to be, 'Despite us not being related the plot has magically connected us! Also you're evil.'

Nothing jedi-like? Just taking the sacred jedi texts with her, and the strong implication that Luke's "not the last jedi" line is in reference to Rey carrying on the order.

So the Resistance is Resisting the First Orders Evil[TM]? Sounds very resisty. What else do they actually, do, though? We've not seen them save anyones lives, do anything worth a damn, express any degree of competence, or anything. They Resist! That's all the plot requires them to do, and they're quite bad at it. While I agree the Space Nazi's are so much a caricature of evil they're unsupportable. [At least the Empire had a pretty clear reason for building and using the Death Star. These guys appear to have built theres purely for it's cinematic value] The Resistance has no clear reason for supporting them other than, 1) Carrie Fisher is on their side, 2) They're not Space Nazis.

Did you ever watch the OT? Because all of that applies just as much to the OT rebellion. What do they do, besides fight the empire? They blow up a death star in the first movie, just like the resistance. They run away in the second movie, just like the resistance. You're supposed to assume that they're the good guys and they have a plan, but none of it is ever shown on-screen. It's just taken for granted that they oppose the evil empire, and fill in the blanks yourself. You don't actually see them building a new republic or anything unless you go to the EU.

Phasma was billed as a strong female villian. It sure would have been nice if she turned out to be anything but cheap, but I guess we can't have strong female villians, can we?

Phasma was never convincingly billed as a strong female villain, and her uselessness has nothing to do with her gender. She's the new era's Boba Fett, a minor background character who is hyped up for toy sales.

The first order clearly has another dozen in that shot.

All of them reduced to shattered wreckage along with the flagship. But remember, the main ship is being tracked and has no hope of escape. The resistance traded one ship that was going to die anyway for an entire fleet, and if you ignore the ridiculous plot device siege gun it secures the escape of the surviving leadership and a chance to regroup with their allies. The only thing wrong with the scene from a plausibility point of view is that the resistance didn't do the same thing with the smaller escorts, sending them on suicide runs with their last fuel reserves instead of leaving them to drift out of control and be used for target practice. But obviously that can't happen for story reasons if you want the main scene to have any impact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The fans wanted a Luke/Snoke showdown.

Well, at least I did anyway.

Well you and the fans were wrong. It was never going to happen, and it wouldn't make any sense.

 Peregrine wrote:
Did you ever watch the OT? Because all of that applies just as much to the OT rebellion. What do they do, besides fight the empire? ... They run away in the second movie, just like the resistance.

The Rebellion ran away, the Resistance died. In The Empire Strikes Back the Rebellion was on the back foot but they escaped with a fleet to continue the fight another day. In The Last Jedi a galaxy-spanning superpower is reduced to the contents of a single light freighter, with no allies willing to aid them in their time of need.

@Peregrine

The Hero Vs. The Villian is a classic trope that has been embedded into the Western psyche for thousands of years.

Satan Vs. God

Odysseus Vs. the suitors

Caesar Vs. Pompey

Wellington Vs Napoleon

Coca Cola Vs. Pepsi

etc etc

strictly speaking, you could argue that Caesar and Pompey didn't have that much of a different moral outlook from each other, but the ultimate showdown between two great rivals, is expected and demanded by any audience, going back to the days of Ancient Greece.

Luke Vs. Vader is the backbone of the entire Star Wars franchise. To not have Luke Vs. Snoke, is heresy as far as I'm concerned




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Did you ever watch the OT? Because all of that applies just as much to the OT rebellion. What do they do, besides fight the empire? ... They run away in the second movie, just like the resistance.

The Rebellion ran away, the Resistance died. In The Empire Strikes Back the Rebellion was on the back foot but they escaped with a fleet to continue the fight another day. In The Last Jedi a galaxy-spanning superpower is reduced to the contents of a single light freighter, with no allies willing to aid them in their time of need.

That's a very good point.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Did you ever watch the OT? Because all of that applies just as much to the OT rebellion. What do they do, besides fight the empire? ... They run away in the second movie, just like the resistance.

The Rebellion ran away, the Resistance died. In The Empire Strikes Back the Rebellion was on the back foot but they escaped with a fleet to continue the fight another day. In The Last Jedi a galaxy-spanning superpower is reduced to the contents of a single light freighter, with no allies willing to aid them in their time of need.

Also, whilst it's not clear in the movie, what we see on Hoth isn't the Alliance, just the High Command. It would be a crippling blow to lose them but there would be other leaders out there that would take up the fight.

In contrast, the what we see at the beginning of the film is presented as the entirety of the Resistance. Later on we hear about secret allies* who care so much about the cause that they refuse to answer the call.

* I look forward to Ep 9 not even addressing the question of "Who were the secret allies?" Presumably they'll all be killed off-screen by the Knights of Ren, who are also guarding the last copy of Snoke's best-selling autobiography "Where I Came From".

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Hero Vs. The Villian is a classic trope that has been embedded into the Western psyche for thousands of years.

Yes, and Luke is not the hero of the new movies. He's a supporting character, and supporting characters don't get the final climactic fight. The moment it was revealed that the new movies would be moving on with new characters, not continuing the stories of the OT characters, it was incredibly obvious that Luke would not be the one to fight Snoke.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlexHolker wrote:
The Rebellion ran away, the Resistance died. In The Empire Strikes Back the Rebellion was on the back foot but they escaped with a fleet to continue the fight another day. In The Last Jedi a galaxy-spanning superpower is reduced to the contents of a single light freighter, with no allies willing to aid them in their time of need.

Yes, it's rather stupid from a "writers have no sense of scale" point of view, but from a thematic point of view (as the original discussion was) it's functionally the same. The events of the movies parallel each other, so if you want to argue that the resistance is some nihilistic postmodern deconstruction of a rebellion then you have to make the same argument for the rebellion of the OT. Both do the same thing on-screen, and the greater depth and purpose of the OT rebellion only exists in the EU.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
@Peregrine

The Hero Vs. The Villian is a classic trope that has been embedded into the Western psyche for thousands of years.

Caesar Vs. Pompey

Caesar did not kill Pompey - he was killed by the Egyptians much to Caesars annoyance - and neither of them were heros or villans - you might be able to argue Augustus vs Marc Antonoy - but only if you looked at it from the Hardline Roman view.

Same with Greece vs Persia - despite the laughable propoganda about the former being the land of the free -Greece was a major slave owning society - especially Sparta, plus not a few Greek cities and kings/queen fought for Persia and did very well out it.

Snoke I quite liked - shame he is out of it.

This totally hit the nail on the head and I'm in the exact same boat. lol

Well at least the RT ratings by the official critics confirm the contempt I have for them.

Well, I finally got to see this tonight, and thought it was freaking awesome. So much win in this movie.

I loved the direction they took Luke. Rather curious how they're going to paint Leia out in the next one, though.

I really just want Star Wars movies that I do not have to work hard to like.

I tried quite hard to like the TFA.

I did not have to try as hard to like TLJ.

I didn't have to try at all to like R1.

This new trilogy is too different and too conflicted. Too schizoid for me to really like them.

I just don't care about the new characters.

I cared about the original characters.

Had a chat with my sister about the movie and she really liked it. Now she's what I'd term a casual fan, the closest she gets to any EU content is watching Lego Star Wars with her little girl. So again I really think my own expectations for the direction of the film not being met are what bothered me the most. That said I think the hyperspace ramming and the wasting of Holdo is always going to annoy me.

I think Disney was always in a lose-lose situation to some extent with a sequel trilogy. The problem is the EU and in a way the prequels. I think people had a vision of something along the lines of the good EU being redone or maybe a new great Galactic Republic a la KotOR or prequel era. That was never going to happen and if Disney did do that they'd be getting criticized for doing that.

So they had to do something original and move on past the OT...but I do agree they could have done something better. I don't think Abrams was ever a good choice and I'm worried he'll flub the final act.

 insaniak wrote:
Well, I finally got to see this tonight, and thought it was freaking awesome. So much win in this movie.

I loved the direction they took Luke. Rather curious how they're going to paint Leia out in the next one, though.

Many of the theories I have seen suspect the next film with be a more significant time jump. Maybe 2-3 year like the difference between ANH and ESB
This would allow Rey to become a true Jedi (remember, she took (or maybe Yoda did?) all those texts from the tree without Luke knowing) and possibly have started training more younglings
Kylo would also be more established as the Supreme Leader, etc

As for Leia, the movie could easy start out as Leia just passing and the new group dealing with that lose. Honestly, they'll probably just explain it in the crawl.
TLJ was all about learning from failure and it set up the new cast as taking those positions of leadership left open by the passing of the old. So even though Lucasfilm has stated that IX was going to be focused on Leia, I don't think much has to really change. Leia can be a source of inspiration for the Resistance and Force Ghost Luke can fill any direct guidance role that Leia was originally going to have.

-

I don't think the key is who read the EU and who didn't. The difference seems to fall closer to who cares about stories for the content of the story vs who enjoys stories for the way they are told. The critics like the film because it was made by a filmmaker for filmmakers, but people who like, let's say books although I'm really reaching more towards a mindset than an actual hobby, can't get past the flaws. Love the film because of how it is shot and cinematically constructed. Hate the film because the plot and characterization is stupid and throws continuity out the airlock.


Honestly, I suspect RJ doesn't read fiction, certainly not science fiction, and his inexperience with the genre shows through.


JJ probably doesn't read at all.

I've figured out what I'm going to open with when someone asks me IRL what I thought of the movie:



After finding out Kylo is still a bad dude even after killing Snoke on the flagship, Rey tries to get her lightsaber back with the force instead of answering him with words.

Did she intend to cut him down as she would have Snoke? Was she preparing to defend herself? Was she angry? Afraid? Resolved?

The lightsaber is split in twain from the power of the two force users, and the flagship is crippled by the hyperspeed launch-cruiser.

The next scene Kylo Ren is in he takes command of the FO and pledges to burn all to the ground.

The next scene Rey is in she insta kills three tie fighters with one turret shot (bare minimum necessary to impress after the ridiculousness Poe regularly demonstrates) from the Millennium Falcon. She's bubbly enthusiastic about her station in life, exclaiming "this is fun!"

How does she feel about Kylo now?
Did she spare his life?
Did the impact knock her to a different level of the ship?
How did she get off the Imperial Flagship?


TLJ doesn't care. So why should I?

Look, how and why characters react to events or overcome obstacles is not important to the story. If we did things your way we'd slow the movie down with all kinds of character growth, dramatic escapes, interpersonal dynamics and derring do. That's just not what this film is about.

Can you imagine a movie like Die Hard having McLane and Gruber in the same room and then wasting our time showing us how they get out of the same room without killing each other?

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Had a chat with my sister about the movie and she really liked it. Now she's what I'd term a casual fan, the closest she gets to any EU content is watching Lego Star Wars with her little girl. So again I really think my own expectations for the direction of the film not being met are what bothered me the most. That said I think the hyperspace ramming and the wasting of Holdo is always going to annoy me.

To hell with Holdo.

That final ride should have belonged to Ackbar and Leia.

I greatly disagree with killing Ackbar as a sidenote.

 Galef wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Well, I finally got to see this tonight, and thought it was freaking awesome. So much win in this movie.

I loved the direction they took Luke. Rather curious how they're going to paint Leia out in the next one, though.

Many of the theories I have seen suspect the next film with be a more significant time jump. Maybe 2-3 year like the difference between ANH and ESB
This would allow Rey to become a true Jedi (remember, she took (or maybe Yoda did?) all those texts from the tree without Luke knowing) and possibly have started training more younglings
Kylo would also be more established as the Supreme Leader, etc

As for Leia, the movie could easy start out as Leia just passing and the new group dealing with that lose. Honestly, they'll probably just explain it in the crawl.
TLJ was all about learning from failure and it set up the new cast as taking those positions of leadership left open by the passing of the old. So even though Lucasfilm has stated that IX was going to be focused on Leia, I don't think much has to really change. Leia can be a source of inspiration for the Resistance and Force Ghost Luke can fill any direct guidance role that Leia was originally going to have.

-

I think they'll emphasise Leia's role as a symbol very heavily. She was, to many people (both as fans and in-universe) the original Hero of the Rebellion, so I can see them using her legacy as a rallying point or reminder of what they're fighting for or something similar. A hologram projection of one of her speeches used as the signal to kick off an uprising against a FO uprising, or a 'For the Princess' battle cry or something like that. After that, have someone mention that despite the fact she's gone, she's still 'leading' the Rebellion.

It continues the theme established with the use of Luke in VIII, that the legend of Luke and Leia and Han and The Rebellion is as powerful a force as any blaster, lightsaber or starship.

 dogma wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:

At this point, Kylo represents a rejection of all meaning. He is more or less nihilist, or at the least trying to represent a Nietzschean Will to Power.

If that's your read of Nietzsche, then you read him wrong. If you interpret nihilsim as the rejection of all meaning, then you failed to understand an entire philosophical movement.

I think you might have misread my post. Also, here are a few of definitions of nihilism:

Existential nihilism is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value.

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Define nihilism: a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless

Nihilism is a philosophical doctrine that suggests the lack of belief in one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Look, how and why characters react to events or overcome obstacles is not important to the story. If we did things your way we'd slow the movie down with all kinds of character growth, dramatic escapes, interpersonal dynamics and derring do. That's just not what this film is about.

Can you imagine a movie like Die Hard having McLane and Gruber in the same room and then wasting our time showing us how they get out of the same room without killing each other?

So what your saying is a story does not need "character growth, dramatic escapes, interpersonal dynamics and derring do" and they never need to "react to events or overcome obstacles" Because that is not what the last jedi is about...

Wow, look if you are happy with not having any of the above to consider a film good, then fair enough, people like me want these things, as you know, it makes a good story, and not a series of set pieces that make little to no sense.

Sarcasm ~

 Peregrine wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Hero Vs. The Villian is a classic trope that has been embedded into the Western psyche for thousands of years.

Yes, and Luke is not the hero of the new movies. He's a supporting character, and supporting characters don't get the final climactic fight. The moment it was revealed that the new movies would be moving on with new characters, not continuing the stories of the OT characters, it was incredibly obvious that Luke would not be the one to fight Snoke.

Actually, what they could have done is rehashed the Obi Wan vs Vader fight, except with Snoke and Luke. Luke dies heroically trying to save Rey, who gets overpowered by Snoke, Rey now has a reason to get stronger and Snoke is shown to be very powerful and dangerous. I mean, you'd think they would at least copy that formula, considering how much else they copied.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mitochondria wrote:

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Had a chat with my sister about the movie and she really liked it. Now she's what I'd term a casual fan, the closest she gets to any EU content is watching Lego Star Wars with her little girl. So again I really think my own expectations for the direction of the film not being met are what bothered me the most. That said I think the hyperspace ramming and the wasting of Holdo is always going to annoy me.

To hell with Holdo.

That final ride should have belonged to Ackbar and Leia.

I greatly disagree with killing Ackbar as a sidenote.

Ditto. Adding a new character was unnecessary, and putting Ackbar in her place would have been a worthy send off.

 Luciferian wrote:

Existential nihilism is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value.

The key word here is "intrinsic", with the implication being that meaning and value are assigned by persons.

 Luciferian wrote:

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy.

Thanks for reiterating The Big Lebowski's stance on nihilism, by way of The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

YOU are confusing nihilism and Nietzsche. Nietzsche's Ubermensch takes responsibility to assign value and meaning. Nihilism is the lack of belief in meaning and value. There is a pretty large difference; just ask Nietzsche.

 Luciferian wrote:
Nietzsche's Ubermensch takes responsibility to assign value and meaning.

Did anyone hear 5 trumpet notes being played there...?

From that other John Williams 70's film theme...

I haven't seen it yet, but after reading all the spoiler talk I kinda feel like I should just satisfy myself by going back to reread some of the great parts of the EU rather than watch The Last Jedi.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I haven't seen it yet, but after reading all the spoiler talk I kinda feel like I should just satisfy myself by going back to reread some of the great parts of the EU rather than watch The Last Jedi.

I recommend playing Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2.